Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Bristol-myers Squibb Holdings Ireland Unlimited Company & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Cipla Limited – Respondent
CS(COMM) 688 of 2019, CC(COMM) 8 of 2020 & I.A. 17696 of 2019 (Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC)
Decided On : 17-05-2023
Settlement Agreement - Patent Dispute - The court found the terms of the settlement to be lawful and in order, leading to the disposal of the suit in accordance with the Settlement Agreement.
Fact of the Case:
The disputes between the parties were settled through a Settlement Agreement dated 26th April 2023, leading to the disposal of the suit.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the terms of the settlement to be lawful and in order, and therefore, nothing remained for adjudication in the present suit. The suit was disposed of in terms of the Settlement Agreement, and the plaintiffs were entitled to a refund of the court fee paid by them.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lawful and in order nature of the settlement terms, leading to the disposal of the suit.
Final Decision: The suit was disposed of in terms of the Settlement Agreement, and the plaintiffs were entitled to a refund of the court fee paid by them.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The disputes between the parties stand settled. Settlement Agreement dated 26th April 2023 is on record. The terms of the settlement read thus:
"1. The Defendant confirms that it did not commercialize Apixaban and/or any of its pharmaceutically acceptable salts in any form (API or finished formulation under the brand name "APIGY" or otherwise) during the term of the suit patent i.e. until September 17, 2022 and the same was commercialized only after the expiry of the suit patent i.e. after September 17, 2022.
2. The undertaking given above by the Defendant shall be binding henceforth on the Defendant, their associates, representatives, successors, partners, employees, affiliates and assignees-in-business.
3. The Defendant agrees to withdraw the Counter Claim filed in the suit bearing number CC(COMM) No. 8 of 2022 filed before the Hon'ble Court.
4. The present suit may be decreed in terms of the present Settlement Agreement and the Plaintiffs may seek refund of full court fees paid by it under Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870.
5. That in case of any breach of the terms of settlement, the parties reserve their right to seek any remedies available to them in law and equity including a right to revive the suit and claim damages against the said Defendant.
6. The Parties agree that they have executed the present Settlement Agreement of their own free will and volition, without any force or pressure from any person. The Parties also agree that they have understood the contents of the present Settlement Agreement as the same have been explained to them by the Mediator and their respective counsels, in the presence of each other and they have consented to the same in its true letter and spirit, and as such they shall not dispute the same ever in future.
7. The Parties agree that they shall abide by the terms and conditions set out in the present Settlement Agreement and shall not dispute the same hereinafter in future either themselves or through any third parties. The Parties further agree that the statements made by them herein in this Settlement Agreement shall be taken as their respective undertakings to the Hon'ble Court.
8. The Parties hereto state that they have no further claims or demands against each other, and all the disputes and differences have been amicably settled by the Parties hereto through the process of mediation.
9. The Parties undertake to present themselves before the Hon'ble Court during the hearing confirming the terms of the Settlement Agreement."
2. The parties are represented by their respective learned Counsel.
3. The Court has perused the terms of settlement and finds them to be lawful and in order. As such, nothing survives for adjudication in the present suit.
4. The suit stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 26th April 2023. Decree-sheet be drawn up accordingly.
5. The plaintiffs would be entitled to refund of the court fee paid by them, if any.
6. Miscellaneous application is also disposed of.
Settlement agreements in patent infringement cases can lead to the decree of the suit and entitlement to a refund of court fees.
The acknowledgment of patent validity and early settlement entitles the plaintiff to a full refund of court fees under CPC Order XXIII Rule 3.
Settlement agreements reached through mediation are binding and enforceable, and parties are entitled to court fee refunds when disputes are amicably resolved.
The court's decision was influenced by the settlement agreement, which was found to be lawful and binding upon the parties, leading to the decree in favor of Defendant 1.
Mutual settlement of disputes allows parties to withdraw claims under Order XXIII Rule 3, leading to court decreeing the suit based on agreed terms.
Enforcement of settlement terms under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC and decreeing of the suit in terms of the settlement
A settlement agreement binds the parties, allowing for a decree based on its terms, reinforcing the importance of procedural compliance in legal settlements.
A settlement agreement reached by parties in trademark disputes is valid and can lead to a decree in its terms, including the refund of court fees based on amicable resolution.
Parties may resolve disputes through a valid Settlement Agreement, which the court can incorporate into a decree, and the plaintiff may be entitled to a refund of court fees upon settlement.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
